tv The Cycle MSNBC January 10, 2013 3:00pm-4:00pm EST
balanced, this is the guy who did it. three times. over the past year, i have sought jack's advice on virtually every decision from economic policy to foreign policy. >> it signals a shift in white house priorities. if confirmed, lew replaces tim geithner whose background helped him navigate the financial vie sis and new wall street regulations and lew spent three years working with wall street the background is in budget fights and matches washington's new focus. lew was an aide to tip o'neill in the '80s helping score the social security deal with president reagan, led the budget office under president clinton and obama and helping not only to balance the budget in the '90s but generate a surplus. two years ago, he helped negotiate the budget control act. politico puts it this way. tim geithner was a banking man tapped to handle a banking crisis. jack lew is a budget guy being brought in to handle the
government's fiscal disaster. on the hill, a handful of republicans oppose lew's confirmation but survived the process twice in four years at omb director and deputy secretary of state. we have jake sherman here. we're hearing yet another white man added to a cabinet with quite a few white men and dwindling number of females s. the president and the team feeling president to add some more diverse faces to the team? >> they released a photo showing that president obama does, in fact, have female advisers in the inner circle and more opportunities yesterday. solis said she was stepping down from the labor department which she ran since the beginning of the administration. transportation is a role that they've been wishy-washy on whether ray la hood would say and more opportunities. susan rice is still around but a pr disaster for the white house.
on the front page of "new york times," not something you want to do as trying to get your second term rolling and get a head start in to a year full of budget fights. >> right. especially an election and very critical of the other side's lack of diversity. valerie jarrett's leg was in night's photo. >> that's important. >> are we going to hear pushback on this nomination at all from the left? lew has less wall street -- fewer wall street ties than geithner an he was a coo at citigroup. he said during the 2010 crisis he didn't believe financial deregulation was a proximate cause of the crisis. will we see pushback from the left on this confirmation? >> we saw barney sanders of vermont say he's against the nomination but there's another problem, too. house republicans who are the only republicans in control in town really almost despise jack
lew, do not see him as an honest broker and someone to work with and a story on politico tomorrow i'm working on puts a nail in the coffin on tax reform and republicans trying to jump start for a long time and problems practically with house republicans and negotiating budget deals, with jack lew. i mean, john boehner doesn't want him in the room negotiating. he will be in the backseat for the next couple of months after this fiscal cliff disaster but he's not going to have a problem getting through the senate and confirmed no. one really thinks this. >> let me just ask you about that a little bit more, jake. he managed to rub some folks in the 2011 debt negotiations the wrong way. in the bob woodward book "the prince of politics" and quotes some as calling lew dismissive, obnoxious, disrespectful. jeff sessions who's a ranking member of the senate budget committee put out a statement or will release a statement saying lew must never become the
secretary of the treasury. mike lee released a statement saying that the lew nomination was moving in the wrong direction. are these outliers or do you expect some of that resistance to lew to build over the next week or so? >> i think it's safe to say that republicans will not be rushing to support jack lew's nomination but that doesn't matter a ton it doesn't seem like. as you said in the intro, he will sail through, he sailed through before, but there's resistance to working with jack lew from the right on capitol hill. that's not an understatement. people do not like negotiating with him. >> jack lew worked for citigroup but -- citibank and not really a banker, not part of the wall street club. he's very little in the way of like traditional economic background we see in the sort of job. what does that signal to you for the president choosing him this way? >> i mean, jack lew, if you walk to people on capitol hill and d.c. they see him as somebody who really gets the budget
process but you're right. he had the new years at citigroup and i think republicans are trying to hang around his neck at this point but that was kind of a footnote in jack lew's career and i'll probably be hammered for saying that but this is a guy that worked for one most prolific speakers of the house and i don't think when jack lew -- when the biography is some point written they'll talk a lot about the work at citigroup but how he is a fix xur of washington. think of that as what you may but he is a fixture of this town and someone, one of those figures who knows how to get things done. >> for a second there, jake, i guess from the sort of progressive perspective, the concern of lew beyond any wall street ties or anything might be that if you welcome at the track record in the 2011 debt ceiling negotiations he was open to pretty significant changes involving social security, medicare, the medicare retirement age. a lot of reporting suggests he
was in favor of a deal to raise the medicare retirement age. are we to read anything in to use him as the point man of the negotiations in the upcoming negotiations about where the white house might end up on those questions? >> well, i tell you what republicans are saying today on capitol hill and that is that they see this as a step in the wrong direction which for progressives is probably a step in the right direction if you could follow that because they think that every time they tried to float something on entitlements, jack lew shot it down and the president much more than open than jack lew to some of those changes so i think republicans think that this is a step in the wrong direction for them. but listen. there's definitely always concern from progressives. i think that's natural. and this administration has broadly been open in words, maybe not in deeds, republicans would say, to changes to social security, medicare and medicaid. so i guess he falls in line. he has been resistant according to people involved in the negotiations to major overhauls
to the entitlement system. >> you mentioned that republicans don't like negotiating with him. with is that because he's really good at it? is it because he's hard to work with? i mean, is this a good choice for the president because he's hard nosed and a good negotiator or is it going to put a bad taste in republicans' mouths? >> what the complaint always is about jack lew is he can never get to yes. and maybe that means he's a good negotiator for the president because the president might not have wanted to get to yes and not the guy to deliver that but that's been the talk in circles, people that have negotiated with jack lew over the last two, three years is that he can never get to yes. so whether he's reflecting the boss's view or a stubborn negotiator i guess is open to interpretation. republicans certainly are up in arms today. >> well, when we start to project out the negotiations, of course, up against several deadlines and one is particularly serious and that's the debt ceiling and a default is catastrophic economic ramifications for that. one of the thing this is's been
generating some discussion this week is the idea that the president could take advantage of a loophole in the law and order the treasury department to mint and a platinum coin. that's the loophole and worth like a trillion dollars and that could then be deposited in the federal reserve, would not go in general circulation and wouldn't affect inflation and continue to pay the bills without, you know, the consent of congress. this is a way around the debt ceiling if everything reaches a dead end there. is there an indication -- some people are saying carney in the briefing did not, you know, rule this out all the way. is there any indication this is on the white house's radar? >> doesn't seem to be. i mean, the white house isn't even open to the 14th amendment saying the president could raise the debt ceiling and indicates the president could raise the debt ceiling without the consent of congress. doesn't seem like they'd be open to something like this but covering it for three years, i really i guess i wouldn't be surprised if anything happened but this is not gaining real
traction on capitol hill. and it's tough to say what kind of -- what this kind of -- what people are calling a gimmick means for the negotiations. republicans across the board blasted this idea and doesn't seem realistic especially as you said there's issues and not only debt ceiling, sequester and government funtding so if the president wants a deal on any of those, making a new coin to raise the debt ceiling probably wouldn't bode well for the totality of those negotiations. >> i would say minting a coin, it definitely is sort of gimmicky or silly and so is using the debt ceiling as a hostage taking technique so glad that they haven't totally ruled that out yet and use it maybe as leverage in this upcoming fight. jake, thanks so much for joining us. >> thanks, guys. up next, the white house calling in the big guns to get on its message on gun control. a busy thursday at 1600 pennsylvania avenue and we have it covers here. [ female announcer ] research suggests cell health
humans. even when we cross our t's and dot our i's, we still run into problems. namely, other humans. at liberty mutual insurance, we understand. that's why our auto policies come with accident forgiveness if you qualify, where your rates won't go up due to your first accident, and new car replacement, where, if you total your new car, we give you the money for a new one. call... to talk to an insurance expert about everything else that comes standard with our base auto policy. and if you get into an accident and use one of our certified repair shops, your repairs are guaranteed for life. call... to switch, and you could save hundreds. ♪ born to make mistakes liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? this reduced sodium soup says it may help lower cholesterol, how does it work? you just have to eat it as part of your heart healthy diet. step 1. eat the soup.
we learned today that vice president joe biden will present his gun violence recommendations to the president next tuesday. this afternoon, biden sat down with the national rifle association, a first for the obama administration. the nra says its membership increased by more than 100,000 since the sandy hook shooting. attorney general holder is meeting with dick's sporting goods and walmart. white house is calling in heavy
hitters to change public opinion including bill clinton who denounced the use of assault weapons and the administration has the strongest ally in gabby giffords, herself a victim of gun violence but the president has work cut out for him. nearly half of all americans oppose a ban or semiautomatic weapons including those in the federal assault weapons ban that expired near lay decade ago. so let's spin on all of this. i guess what this is building towards at least politically is the white house and allies want to try to isolate the nra, even on the right and within the republican party and so you have a meeting today with walmart, dick's sporting goods. they want to take, you know, groups like that, businesses like that, interests like that and sort of pit everyone, this sort of wide array against the nra and dare house republicans to side with this unpopular group. i'm a little skeptical that anything is actually going to come out of this legislateively.
we have talked about this before. i just think that the most -- if you look at 1968, 1993, 1994, three times with real gun control, and then half century, basically, democratic president, democratic house and senate. the numbers are there for the party to move things. they just aren't there not running the house right now and reminded that in 1994 with the assault weapons ban you can read the newspaper headlines may 1994 when chuck schumer of new york, this was his ticket to fame sort of got the assault weapons ban through the house. overwhelming democratic control of the house. the headlines were, turning point in the war against the nra. the nra's now in retreat. the dynamics have changed and we remember what happened after that. >> paid a price. >> democrats kind of backed off guns in clinton years and then gore losing the rural states and now again saying can they beat the nra? >> i'm reminded all last year we
talked a lot about republicans living in a bubble. right? sort of refusing to believe the reality of the election and how it was going for mitt romney and president obama. i think republicans truly believed that most of america hated the president. and that that would solve the election. well, most of the country actually really liked obama. whatever they thought of his policies and i think refusing to work in the realm of the real really hurt republicans. i would offer the same advice to some gun control advocates who often refuse to work in the realm of the real. i think they truly believe most of the country is anti-gun and despises the nra and that just isn't the case. there's a great piece in bloomberg business week saying what explains the effectiveness of blocking gun control, the nra wins because it's popular with a broad swath of americans.
he says dan gross, the brady campaign president, promotes a common misconception that the nra bamboozled lawmakers in to thinking that the lobby is more powerful than it is like some kind of real world "wizard of oz." and doesn't square with the facts. 45% of americans live in a home with one gun or more. 54% feel favorably about the nra so there's some reality that i think needs to be injected into these debates and if advocates deal with that reality, they might be better positioned to have some of their arguments. >> the reality is why the nra wins and represent gun manufacturers and bullet manufacturers and there's a ton of money in that and they have more money to play with. i don't think there's any illusion that many people, most people are gun rights people. and the gun control people are the minority. i think that's quite clear. i'm happy to see people like
gabby giffords come in to the debate and lorraine jobs, steve jobs' widow. come in to the debate helping giffords with her pac and saying to have an equal amount of money, perhaps more money to play with than the nra has. happy to see the explainer in chief bill clinton come in to the debate and important to have somebody like that who is a gun control -- i mean a gun safety and gun culture person like the debate you had with howard on the show yesterday. outlined the sort of cultural difference. you are a gun person. you're a hunter. you know all about guns. howard doesn't. i don't know everything about guns but that doesn't mean we can't have a part in the discussion. >> yeah. >> gun safety, reasonable gun laws. i mean, one study you cited and -- you cited but universal background checks polls well. doesn't change your ability to have the guns you want to have. and we have talked about executive action from the white house. i think it's almost certain that we'll see some executive action
and the right -- not all of the right but some of the right using that as a boogieman. here he comes to take away your guns. obama is a friend to the nra. >> i would not say he's friend to the nra. >> expanded gun rights. only done that. not trying to take away guns. what we'll see is not taking away anyone's guns or banning anything but doing things legal, setting up a database and money for police and mental health. things we can do. >> to your point about the nra, this is not unique to the nra, a lot of interest groups do, they're good at convincing the members that any gun restrictions is a slippery slope and so when you look at the polling, it reminds of the health care debate in reverse in a weird way looking at the polling asking broadly about gun rights, people are supportive of the 2nd amendment, of gun rights in general, of the nra in general because that's what they associate the nra with. as you're pointing out, when you
ask about some of the specifics like background checks in particular, people are very supportive of tightening up background checks so i think as democrats, as people who are wanting to have this conversation, it is so important to be really, really specific at all times about exactly what you are talking about and what you're advocating for and, steve, to your point, i share your skepticism anything meaningful other than the president could do with an executive action will happen with this congress but i do think that the strategy they're pursuing of basically pointing the -- painting the nra and the republicans in to a corner saying this is one more issue, one more example where the republicans are extreme, out of touch and totally unwilling to bend on the ideology, i think that can be a useful tool in order to take back the house in 2014 and i know it looks like a long shot right now but depending on how the debt ceiling negotiations go, depending on what -- how much of a disaster the republicans look
like, i think there's a real possibility that in 2014 that could happen. >> and then we could have -- then we could have change as you were saying once democrats are in control of everything. >> yeah, yeah. toure gets that disconnect there. the only action of obama in the first term to make it easier to bring them in to national parks but i think in the nra's mind, you know that scene from "the american president." michael douglas says, i'm going to get the guns. and it's the nra. obama's just waiting to do that. >> it's like the clint eastwood thing. talking to a chair, an imagined obama. not talking to the real obama. not criticizing a real obama and possible and they're criticizing an imaginary obama. hee's a -- >> what i was saying -- >> not intentionally. >> what i think the -- what i would say politically the nra would say is they have to do this to restrain him from saying i'm going to get the guns. there are liberals that would
like him to channel michael douglas more. we'll see what happens with haul of this debate. odds are you'll hear president obama mention gun violence in his inaugural address on january 21st taking the oath of office twice, once at the white house on january 20th at mandated by the constitution and then at a public swearing in ceremony at the capitol. on the 20th, using the first lady's family bible following day, he'll use two bibles. one stacked atop the other. lots of extra bible power there, i guess. lincoln bible which he also used in 2009 and martin luther king jr.'s traveling bible. "the cycle"'s friend says i think that's amazingly american. from one hot button topic to another, house republicans and the push to defund planted parenthood. two bills are in congress. didn't we handle this already?
while officially members of congress have been telling us for months that the number one priority is jobs and the economy, the first days of the 2013 congress, two representatives from tennessee seem most focused on planned parenthood. the republican women each reintroduced separate bills to prohibit title x family planning grants to any organization performing boergss. title x family planning is only one for family planning and related health services and it was enacted under nixon. title x programs work with more than 5 million people through 4,500 clinics in the u.s. and especially important in helping low-income families. that's the intent.
now a bill to defund planned parenthood stripping it of the financial support is proffered twice. notice guest spot today, laura basset, political reporter and her latest story on the bills is running right now and, laura, you know, we had the election where the president won single women by 35 points partly because of comments of people like mourdock and pushing anti-choice provisions. is this how republicans want to start the session? >> you know, i think the point that people often forget is planned parenthood has a pretty powerful political arm. and most of that money was spent on defeating republicans and electing democrats so i think republicans, you know, in addition to the issue of taxpayer funding for abortions this is about saving their own necks at this point. they're coming out of the gate
eager to take planned parenthood down. >> so you think it's more of a political tool than specifically going after planned parenthood for what they do? i guess it's for them a win-win situation. they don't like what they do and their political power. but "time" magazine has a cover story right now that's titled 40 years ago abortion rights advocates won and now losing ever since. i agree with that. we have seen an erosion of women's reproductive rights and options. but i'm wondering if we have seen a political turning point in that regard. 2012 we saw the second largest number of anti-choice provisions enacted across the united states. second only to 2011. it seems like there is more public awareness, more public backlash. do you think that that political dynamic flipped to be more in favor of the pro-choice argument
and in actually expanding rights for female reproductive options? >> i do. polling, it is interesting. when you frame it in terms of are you pro-choice or pro-life? fewer people than there were ten years ago saying they're pro-choice but do you want to uphold roe v. wade and abortion should be legal in all or some circumstances, most people say yes and might be a problem of messaging but the majority of people especially after the election want the government out of women's health care decisions. >> planned parenthood like to say abortions is 3% of what they do. that is likely low but translating in to 332,278 abortions last year but their own numbers, that's 900 a day. couldn't the calculus, laura, be for representatives blackburn and black that among their caucus and their base, of fiscal
conservatives and social conservatives, the more they know that kind of number the more likely they are to oppose sending taxpayer money to an organization like planned parenthood? >> you're right but i think that the money that goes to -- i know that the money that goes to planned parenthood is ruded for contraception and family planning services. >> right. >> none of it pays for abortions. >> right. >> if you oppose abortions it seems that you would be in favor of providing programs for low coast and free birth control. >> having to do both at the same time, right? i send my taxpayer money to planned parenthood knowing they perform 900 abortions a day. i can't split my money that way. >> yif you want to take away th services, the women -- doesn't take away the demand for abortions but women need them. they're not able to prevent the
pregnancies. they will go somewhere else. less safe or more emotionally or logistically difficult for them. >> or stay open on private funding. that's the other option. >> right. the argument is that all of their abortions are privately funded anyway. >> well, let's -- you know, we're getting in to the -- you know, this bill a little bit and the implications and if it's law but let's just figure out first, is this actually going anywhere in the house? anybody can produce a bill. now you have two congresswomen introducing basically the same legislation and not much coordination going on there on the republican side and any indication, the key question in the house, any indication that the house republican leadership is going to make it a priority and move this to the floor and get a vote on this and this will become a serious issue this year? >> if you think back to 101, they used planned parenthood as a political football and basically held it hostage over budget negotiations. republicans were prepared to --
for a government shutdown over funding and absolutely a priority for house republicans and particularly the leadership. it wouldn't surprise me if the bill went far and past the house. >> laura, i think about 40 years since roe v. wade was passed. seems difficult to imagine america without it. i mean, is this just part of fabric of america? this is the way that we are now. >> you're right. i think it's really surprising that we're still battling this after so many decades but particularly what's surprising me more is battles over birth control and title x funding. the law was signed in to law by president nixon and a national priority of the time. they used to have republican support and the tides shifted and i'm not sure why. >> we should all be able to get together on preventing unwanted pregnancies. laura basset, thank you so much for your insights. >> thanks for having me. up next, he blew colbert's
mind last night. now neil, one of the most popular science writers of our time takes us for a wild ride through the universe here on "the cycle." >> you have said i'm related to a fish, right? >> oh, yeah. the challenge here is taking it to rocks and planets and stellar processes and the big bang. itsd the unity of all physical entities in the world. >> can you get me $5 worth of whatever it is?
than over-the-counter remedies. prescription tamiflu attacks the flu virus at its source. so don't wait. call your doctor right away. tamiflu is prescription medicine for treating the flu in adults and children one year and older whose flu symptoms started within the last two days. before taking tamiflu tell your doctor if you're pregnant, nursing. have serious health conditions, or take other medicines. if you develop an allergic reaction, a severe rash, or signs of unusual behavior, stop taking tamiflu and call your doctor immediately. children and adolescents in particular may be at an increased risk of seizures, confusion or abnormal behavior. the most common side effects are mild to moderate nausea and vomiting. the flu comes on fast, so ask your doctor about tamiflu. prescription for flu.
nothing. are you stealing our daughter's school supplies and taking them to work? no, i was just looking for my stapler and my... this thing. i save money by using fedex ground and buy my own supplies. that's a great idea. i'm going to go... we got clients in today. [ male announcer ] save on ground shipping at fedex office. it's been said before that we're all connected and now there's scientific research to back it up. our next guest discovered the so-called missing link between our bodies and dna and that of fish and worms and if that's not enough for you now going back further, billions of years to trace the impact of the big bang
on the human body and what he finds might surprise you. with us now is from the university of chicago, neil shubin author of "the universe within: discovering the common history of rocks, planets and people." neil, i'm going to quote you to you and get you to unpack this for me. you write, we recycle hydrogen inside of us comes from the big bang. other elements come from stars and supernovae and will return when the elements get spread around the universe. not to sound zoolander about this but you're saying the big bang is inside me? explain that. >> yeah. we have -- you know, we are loaded with history and every organ, cell and gene of our bodies. we have over 3 billion dleer years of history of life and the planet and 13.7 billion years of history of the universe. the elements inside us, that which makes us, the stuff which
we are began in the big bang and generated in the reactions of stars and in the explosions that spread that stuff around and create other elements. so the element that is are in our body elsewhere before they came to be us and after we die and pass they'll return to the universe and who knows where they might be? another planet or another solar system and mind boggling. >> you blew my mind. >> listening to you, i want to be like, whoa, man. like, heavy, man. i mean, look, i'm going to do the same quote and you said rocks and bodies are time capsules that carry the signature of great events that shaped them. how do we rocks and bodies carry those things and what impact does it have on bodies in particular to be carrying the great events inside them? >> yeah. just -- here's a really neat one. inside every cell of our bodies, okay, that's 2 trillion cells, more than 2 trillion cells, there are clocks, there are clocks based on dna, the
activity of dna and cycles throughout the day and here's the amazing thing. 'm of those 2 trillion clocks inside the body is set to a vir virtd july 24-hour cycle and indeed those clocks going arye causes problems for us. different cancers, mood disorders, as we know with seasonal affective disorder many of us are experiencing and we have relationships of the solar system in our bodies and in the beginning of the planet. >> i think i have to rewatch this interview and take a few minutes to process it what you just said but i did rewatch your interview last night with stephen colbert saying that humans are controlling our own evolution. how did we become so power snfl. >> we're sharing information. you and me. and the viewers. and it eels really that exchange
of information which is halfpiping now at the speed of life and change the planet. right? for billions, millions of years it was a slow darwinian kind of evolution moving along, changes to the planet. some of them rapid and most of them very slow and now think about what we humans can do. for a good and bad. it is really when you think about the power we have with our culture and ideas and education and the way we behave, awesome and scary. >> you know, so apparently there is a connection, you write about, between or we can learn i guess and take the big bang, we can learn lessons of global warming from the big bang and i was trying to understand that and hoping make you could -- >> let me unpack that actually. what we know from studying the history of the plan set carbon is really the link. we associate it with global warming but so much more thinking about the history of the planet. it's the link of rock, air, l e
living creatures. it cycles through and learn the water cycle in school. there's a carbon cycle that acts over long and short time frames. rock, air, water and life exchange carbon. in the rarts at which they exchange that carbon determines how much carbon is in the atmosphere and the amount of carbon in the atmosphere tracks very nicely global temperatures as we know today and as we see in the past, as well. so, really, carbon is not only something we talk about with green house gases but an important link of all elements and properties of our planet. >> neil, what you said about after we pass, you know, our particles will go in to the universe and become part of sort of everything, it is a very profound and possibly spiritual statement and i don't want to make you uncomfortable, you don't have to answer this but does your science inform your spirituality? do you find that the work you have done influences the way that you view sort of spiritual
and supernatural ideas? >> oh, no. that's a fabulous question, actually. i feel deeply connected to the rest of the universe and other living things and that's my science has taken me there. you know? i'm connected to you, to other human beings through the family tree of all humans and we can see that in our dna and connected to monkeys and fish and worms and connected to the planet itself and engenders in me a deep beauty that we contain this inside of us. how cool is that? but also, in me, personally, a sense of responsibility that as connected, i'm a citizen of this planet and a citizen of the universe and it's really important for us to be good stewards of that. >> i'm positive i don't understand a word you just said. i'm going to try. no, fascinating stuff. i appreciate you stopping by. thank you. >> thank you. all right. up next, oscar nominations just out this morning. i'm really excited about the sound mixing nominees. my doctor told me calcium is efficiently absorbed in small continuous amounts.
the blissful pause just before that rich sweetness touches your lips. the delightful discovery, the mid-sweetening realization that you have the house all to yourself. well, almost. the sweet reward, making a delicious choice that's also a smart choice. splenda no-calorie sweetener. with the original sugar-like taste you love and trust. splenda makes the moment yours.
the oscar nominations were unveiled this morning in los angeles and there were very few surprises. tomorrow in my rant i'll help you win your office oscar pool telling you who will win because there's more locks on this list than there are in a scottish map. right, steve? >> thank you. >> yesterday we wondered if it was lincoln versus ar go versus
zero dark thirty. don't get started on les miserables. >> fabulous, fabulous. >> but i digress! time to back spin. i want to focus on the best director race because that's the most clear predictor of best picture in the last nine years, director and picture split once. if you're not nominated, you have no chance. tarrantino is not nominated. ben affleck, kathryn bigelow. no chance to win. i'm happy to see "the master" get three acting nominations. "moon rise kingdom." completely forgotten. i don't know why that is. we are down to the year of
"lincoln." >> so it's the year of lincoln now, huh? >> yeah. interesting. >> ho my god. seriously? >> i have very little to add to the conversation having seen none of them but i want to point out having this conversation with toure -- >> and? and? >> and steve freedman. >> and debating which one -- >> we weren't debating. we were explaining. >> i said i think it's "lincoln." no. suddenly apparently it is now the year of lincoln. so in the rant tomorrow when he's telling you what the pick in your office pool -- >> this is how -- >> you have to follow up with me about this. >> this is not -- >> sounds familiar, doesn't it? >> i remember this happening around some maps. yes? >> uh-huh. >> some election maps? >> uh-huh. which i -- which i also got right and you have -- >> you had it right like -- >> of course, of course, of course! i knew you were calling for it. i'll get you, nick and tracy! you love putting that thing up.
>> version three in the morning after the election. >> no, it did not. >> no. >> better than yours. >> they had not called florida yet. >> you still have it red, don't you? >> i saw only -- >> enough of this. >> i saw "les mis" and "argo." i loved them both. the best part of the year is daytona 500. i'm excited -- i always like seeing the host not psyched for seth mcfar laland. i'm a fan of his and "family guy" but i feel it's nuanced and weird and young and i don't think the wide audience that oscars get will get his humor. unless he really widens it out to mass appeal, i think it's going to come off weird. it's also very self referent shl the humor and writing and if you don't know every "family guy"
episode or what he does, you will miss the jokes. >> i would have been with you until this morning doing the jokes at the nominations and had cute little nominations and i was like maybe he will be able to settle into this. >> i really like ricky gervais at the golden globes -- >> that's a whole different thing. >> i tend to agree with you and there's been a lot of kind of disappointing oscar hosts -- >> many. >> but i found sort of this like diamond in the rough young up and coming comic, you probably haven't heard of him -- >> who? >> his name is billy crystal. they ought to give him a shot one of these years. honest to god, i was so excited when they said last year the whole thing with eddie murphy blew up and they broke the glass in case of emergency and brought out billy chris yas and i was really excited -- >> he's the best. >> he showed up and saved the show. all the grief -- i know he takes a lot of grief. i know the kids like to make fun of him. i'm not going to say anything
about that new movie he just did, but i think he's really funny. >> respect your elders here. >> he's perfect oscar funny. >> he was years ago. no more. >> he hosted sports center a few weeks ago actually. it was a shameless promotion thing for his new movie but they had him co-host sports center for a full hour. i thought he was hilarious. >> he is great. >> a very specific kind of comedic talent and it does it really, really well. apparently it's hard to do because people who are funnier than him do it less well. >> and also i loved "my giant" which i think won three oscars in '98. >> all right then. >> all right then. wow. you might have been the only person who actually saw that. >> saw, appreciated it. >> saw it and loved it.
>> okay. >> we've got to get you out. some good movies or something. >> "when harry met sally." >> get the two of you out. >> you can't even name the last real movie you have seen. >> i can't remember. >> and by real movie -- >> as opposed to a child movie she saw as a parent. but an adult film. >> it costs a lot of money to go to the theater and then the babysitter and by the time 10:00 rolls around i'm ready to go to sleep. >> wow, i'm ready to go to sleep right now. >> they have movies you can watch at home. >> can you watch buttons and get them on demand. >> i do that. >> what's the last -- >> i don't know. i have to think about it, all right? >> up next, sheer lunacy as opposed to what we've been doing for the last minute. why the best thing about this photo according to krystal ball -- wait, valerie jarrett's leg is in that picture? [ male announcer ] where do you turn for legal matters?
maybe you want to incorporate a business. or protect your family with a will or living trust. and you'd like the help of an attorney. at legalzoom a legal plan attorney is available in most states with every personalized document to answer questions. get started at legalzoom.com today. and now you're protected.
is actually hidden behind one of the bros in the bro-tastic photo. that leg is attached to a brilliant and powerful woman who is at the epicenter of presidential power. what really irk s me is this wasn't just the presidential golf and cigar club. this was the group assembled to discuss the fiscal cliff negotiations. in other words, looks like the big economic decisions are being handled by the boys as they always have been and with prior catastrophic results. it's no accident after all that the only high level official to recognize the risk of unregulated derivatives and to fight like hell to get someone to listen and take action was a woman, brooksley born. it's in accident that the person who wall street is most afraid of is also a woman, senator elizabeth warren. it's no accident that the massive high-stakes gambling
that led to our financial meltdown happened at male dominated banks. as christine lagarde said, perhaps lehman's sisters could have avoided default. not only does research show that diversity generally reeds to better decision making, research on gender differences in finance is even more compelling. higher testosterone in the saliva in male traders meant more risk taking. another study found men under pressure surrounded by a bunch of other men take even greater risks. high risk can be great for short-term profitability. it can be disastrous for long-term financial security. now, i acknowledge that the president did want susan rice as his secretary of state. i get that the president isn't just trying to check diversity boxes. he's looking to see who the best person is for the job and i guess it just so happens that the best people are all pretty much white men?
really? really? hamilton. the these qualified ladies came to my mind in the first ten seconds. it's not like we have a lot of other options. the gop has no commitment to belief that america is better when the corridors of power look more like the rest of america. mr. president, we know you have got our back on protecting us from unequal pay, back alley abortions, and transvaginal probes, but you're really letting us down here. we, the women of america, got you re-elected. all right. that does it for us here at "the cycle." martin, it's all yours. >> a true, true crystal ball. it's thursday, january the 10th. ladies and gentlemen, the nra has come to the white house. >> the gun debat